Slaughtering the Red Heifer in Jerusalem/ Rebuild the Temple

6,856 Views | 62 Replies | Last: 6 mo ago by whatthehey78
DeProfundis
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Quote:

That's why your scapegoat's ribbon didn't change color.


The ribbon changing color is not in the Mishnah. It's in the analysis/discussion in the Talmud. It wasn't considered some vital ritual annd isn't annywhere in the Tanakh. And the era where it stopped changing color began in reference to the time after the death of Shi'mon the Righteous from the 3rd century BC. During his life as high priest a number of positive signs were always seen and after his death they would occasionally happen and occasionally not. The changing of the ribbon color was one of these signs. Others included the western candle remaining lit, not needing additional firewood, and the bread provided being enough for the priests.

The discussion of the last 40 years takes this tradition to one of impending doom over the Temple. 40 is an important number in Judaism. It often represents change or transformation. So in the discussion of the end of the Temple era, 40 years or months or days would be important milestones. But it would be exactly 40 years. The Temple was destroyed in 70. You'd have to show that Jesus died in 30 and only in the year 30 for your logic to work.


The era where it stopped changing color was several decades before the fall of the 2nd temple, which coincides with the death of Christ, I know numerology is important to the Hebrew's but it wouldn't be unknown for them to round up 37 to 40.

And 2nd, the scapegoat's color is just a fun trivia fact related in the Talmud, more curious is the explosion of prophets that pre-dated the birth of Christ; Daniel, Moses, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Micah, and dozens more. Overflowing with prophecies concerning the messiah and the fate of Israel. Absent for the last 2,000 years.

Doesn't take more than a couple points to draw that line
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The era where it stopped changing color began centuries earlier. The two Talmuds present the last 40 years in different ways but emphasize the impending doom of the loss of the Temple rather than some new collective sin of the Jewish people. And no, 37 would not just be rounded up nor presented as 40 years in the Talmud. It doesn't work like that. You're trying to force your interpretation on a Jewish text to try and undermine the Jewish text.
BonfireNerd04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

I don't get the Christian hatred for the Temple and sacrifices. People act like they are evil or something. These things were specifically commanded by God Himself. They are good things. Jesus offered sacrifices at the Temple. Christians, at least the Jewish ones, continued to sacrifice at the Temple for almost 40 years after Christ resurrected. So it's not like Jesus, the Apostles or other early Christians thought the Temple sacrifices were bad. James, the Apostle and first Bishop of Jerusalem, was very devout regarding this and just about everything else. So to say they are anti-Christ or bad in any way just doesn't make any sense to me.


Because to people who are firm believers in Replacement Theology, anything that implies that God's covenant with the Jewish people is still in effect is in direct opposition to their religion.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I guess it depends on your definition of Replacement Theology? I think every Christian believes that we are the heirs to the promise to Abraham. That's a fundamental Christian teaching. That would mean the modern Jewish people are not the heir to that promise. You could call that Replacement Theology if you want, but it doesn't really make any sense. Christians have as much claim to Abraham, Moses and the Hebrew prophets as anyone. You can draw a straight, unbroken line of faith from Abraham to modern day Christians. Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism both originated around the same time from a common root, so saying one is replacing the other doesn't make any sense.

OTOH, I don't think it's fair to say that God "moved on" from the Rabbinic Jews. They follow the Mosiac Covenant to the best of their ability. Even though that Covenant has been superceded, IMHO it wasn't nullified. The Mosaic Covenant never mentioned an expiration date. God made many covenants, and the later ones don't nullify the earlier ones. The Abrahamic Covenant didn't nullify the Noahide Covenant. The Mosaic Covenant didn't nullify the Abrahamic Covenant. So I see no reason to think Christ's Covenant negated the Mosaic Covenant.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Junction71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant because He kept the Law perfectly and HIs righteousness is imputed to every believer by faith. The Law kills, it was meant to because no one could keep it and no one will ever be saved by it. Galatians actually says the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Junction71 said:

Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant because He kept the Law perfectly and HIs righteousness is imputed to every believer by faith. The Law kills, it was meant to because no one could keep it and no one will ever be saved by it. Galatians actually says the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ.
Well, I disagree with nearly everything you said. But that discussion has been done to death and I don't have the motivation for it today.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Junction71 said:

Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant because He kept the Law perfectly and HIs righteousness is imputed to every believer by faith. The Law kills, it was meant to because no one could keep it and no one will ever be saved by it. Galatians actually says the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ.


So God gave the Jews a law that kills and doesn't actually do anything for them? That's not an deity anyone would want to worship.
BonfireNerd04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Junction71 said:

Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant because He kept the Law perfectly and HIs righteousness is imputed to every believer by faith. The Law kills, it was meant to because no one could keep it and no one will ever be saved by it. Galatians actually says the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ.


So God gave the Jews a law that kills and doesn't actually do anything for them? That's not an deity anyone would want to worship.


Yeah, according to Christianity, God gave the Jews the Torah, and then 1300 years later announced that it was all a trick to prove that they couldn't keep it. Doesn't seem like a very benevolent god.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nevermind several people in the Bible are said to have kept the whole Torah.
Klaus Schwab
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BonfireNerd04 said:

Sapper Redux said:

Junction71 said:

Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant because He kept the Law perfectly and HIs righteousness is imputed to every believer by faith. The Law kills, it was meant to because no one could keep it and no one will ever be saved by it. Galatians actually says the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ.


So God gave the Jews a law that kills and doesn't actually do anything for them? That's not an deity anyone would want to worship.


Yeah, according to Christianity, God gave the Jews the Torah, and then 1300 years later announced that it was all a trick to prove that they couldn't keep it. Doesn't seem like a very benevolent god.
Well they often didn't keep it and rejected the prophets and ultimately God. It's all external to them. When you place authority in texts then you no longer have a succession of prophets but a succession of scribes. Protestants are similar this, another reason why many support Jews. Amazing that Protestants claim Christ but then immediately reject Him for supporting a lineage of rabbinic Judaism lol.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Go ahead and keep the Law if you want. I mean, roughly a third of the stuff in there can't be done without a temple, but don't let that stop you.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Without being caught up in any theological labels, would someone please read Acts 1:6-8 and tell me what it means? Please think before you respond.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And blaming Scofield for Christian Zionism is just silly. I figured the so-called Reformed people had worked through all of that juvenile "confirmation-class-led-by-a-volunteer-zealot" theology. I'm no fan of old John MacArthur, but he's a 5-pointer and a dispensationalist. Don't be so rigid in judgements.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Church keeps the whole Torah. It's a pretty central teaching of St Paul that we do so.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

The Church keeps the whole Torah. It's a pretty central teaching of St Paul that we do so.


Yeah, I keep a copy of it too.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's not what I meant.

"For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' "


" For when Gentiles, who do not have the Torah, by nature do what the Torah requires, they are a Torah to themselves, even though they do not have the Torah. They show that the work of the Torah is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus."

Christians are to keep the whole Torah. The council of Jerusalem affirmed the Torah requirements for non-Judaean Christians by a strict reading and application of Leviticus.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Clearly they had not yet tried soft shell crab.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dietary restrictions only applied to the sons of Israel, not the nations. No problemo.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And all temple worship. Cause, ya know.

And anything that had to do with geography. Cause, not even the northern kingdom could do that.

94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You know the Torah was given a little bit before the temple was built right?

The northern kingdom set up idols. It's not that they couldn't, it's that they didn't.

Like the Seinfeld bit. They didn't have a problem taking the Torah… they had a problem keeping it.

And all aspects of the sacrificial worship of the Torah are maintained and filled to overflowing in the Eucharist.
Jabin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

You know the Torah was given a little bit before the temple was built right?
Huh? Moses wrote the Pentateuch sometime between 1446-1400 BC.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
right... I was being a little facetious when I said "a little bit". "Temple worship" isn't part of the Torah.
Jabin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ooops



Me
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

right... I was being a little facetious when I said "a little bit". "Temple worship" isn't part of the Torah.


Odd distinction. I suppose in a few weeks when we get our obligatory annual sermon on I Samuel 1, the key point will be that the house of the LORD in Shiloh wasn't actually Solomon's temple.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't understand your point here. Can you explain?
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

I don't understand your point here. Can you explain?
Temple = Tabernacle

And a very slight digression, Christ's tomb = God's throne = Ark of the Covenant
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The worship of the tabernacle was the worship (sacrifice) of the priests in the presence of God. Which is maintained today in Christian practice, and extended and expanded to overflowing from the practice of Israel.
whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DeProfundis said:

The Scofield Bible has wrought such terrible effects on evangelicalism and our nation by extension
Include the Ryrie study Bible.

ETA - The blood of animals does not save.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.